Yes, this is another one of those "coming from an idiot" topics. (Do note the underline and prepare to facepalm. Perhaps multiple times. You might even have to perform a... c-c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker! Fair warning in case you wish to save yourself a trip to the hospital because of self-inflicted wounds to the face in addition to possible brain trauma.)
From what I understand, less time passes for one thing when it's moving faster than another thing. But is that an illusion? I was wondering because, if we measure something that's traveling significantly faster than we are, and we say that it goes from here to there in a second, isn't it really less than a second? And if we constrain it to our perspective, having more time for us to observe its travel (i.e., if our eyes were high speed cameras, we'd be able to observe a bullet in motion after being shot out of a gun) would render the time it saved moot, wouldn't it? At the very least would averaging the times make more sense?
And there was something else about this that confuses me. I heard that only about six days have passed from the perspective of being at the center of the universe, but that sounds like the opposite of what (little) I understand of relativity.